Register, Donate or Volunteer & make a difference!

Detail Page


Accord and satisfaction

Accord and Satisfaction Amendment: – Any authorized party who can accept payments/can accept settlements, settlement by way of a written check, of a documented disputed account.

Any person that has a dispute with a creditor and or 3rd party collector, over the total amount of monies owed, must have a documented dispute of the total of monies owed/emails/certified/video and or audio of phone calls is sufficient if also proven by video that the creditor/collector, etc… and they may tender a settlement offer in full, by way of a negotiable instrument, and any party that receives the check, may accept as settlement if they were ever (current or previous) legitimate assignee, transfer, purchaser of the debt, and or original creditor. It shall not be the responsibility of the consumer to know who has the precise and current legal rights of ownership, to the debt. The original creditor shall be responsible for any active, or formerly active entities that are, or previously were, authorized to handle the debt, in any capacity, pursuant to this legislation. If the debt was unliquidated/then the debt is immediately and permanently cancelled upon the successful depositing of the check by the above mentioned entity types, so long as the required elements herein are sufficed. If the debt is liquidated, then the creditor/collector/etc…has 90 days after successfully depositing the check, to tender the monies back in full, to the sender of the accord and satisfaction sender (of the negotiable instrument), this sending must be to the last known correct address, must be documented/certified/tracking/etc…,and must be videoed. This legislation supersedes any law that tries to shield any entity, in any capacity, with any form of restricting a consumer’s ability to dispute, and or tender an offer, than is what is contained herein this legislation (this includes HOA’s – Home owners Associations, Banks, Insurance companies, and everyone else). An entity is not responsible for which address to tender an accord and satisfaction offer, whether it be a local branch, regional office, check cashing center, or global headquarters, and any location that it is submitted to, shall be acceptable, without exception, any authorized agent to accept payments of any sort is authorized to accept settlement offers in this fashion. Any creation of an agreement/or attempting to enforce a past agreement that prevents, limits, infringes, in any capacity, a person’s rights to effectuate an accord and satisfaction, shall be in violation, and be subject to all fees, cost, legal fees, and punitive damages. Furthermore, a debt cannot be both liquidated and or unliquidated, and if the billing is off/incorrect/even in the slightest, then this constitutes to be included in the unliquidated debt category. No other restrictions shall be placed upon the sender, that is not mentioned herein. The sender must insert clear and concise, easy to read verbiage that the tendered offer is settlement in full/and or final settlement/and or complete pay off offer/etc…, it must also contain words to the effect that this count is in dispute/or has been previously disputed/or something to that effect, and this verbiage must be clearly written in the front memo portion of the check, and also clearly written on the reverse side of the check. The consumer must have photocopies of both sides of the check before sending. The check must also contain the account holders name and account # clearly and concisely written on the front side of the check/either at the top of the check or by the accord verbiage. It is illegal for a creditor or collector to insert language into any agreement to force/attempt to force a person to waive their statutory rights, including the right to accord and satisfaction by use of a negotiable instrument. This will all take effect 1 year after the enactment of this legislation. Upon notification of any consumer dispute that an accord and satisfaction was effectuated, with documented proof, and creditor, collector, and or credit bureau must remove the disputed item unless it is proven that the accord and satisfaction did not occur. Leaving this disputed item on a credit report shall run the risk of $100,000 minimum fine payable to the consumer, if the creditor, collector, and or credit bureau cannot prove that the accord and satisfaction took place – the proof required to be established and presented is thrust upon the creditor, collector, and credit bureau, not by the consumer. Whistleblowers are eligible to pursue these funds against credit bureaus and furnishers that report to the credit bureaus, if they violate this statute. The offender will either be payroll deducted/garnished if still employed/and all assets shall be frozen until the whistleblowers monies are paid in full/if applicable, also, these fines and fees against the offender is not eligible to be discharged in bankruptcy, or any other manner, there is no statute of limitations, there are no bank accounts, monies, property, retirement accounts, trust funds, or other property or accounts that can be protected, as all these accounts are subject to be frozen/seized/sold if necessary, until such time as all fines, fees, costs, legal and other, are fully satisfied. The government/tax payers shall not pay for the legal defense of the person alleged to have violated this legislation. Any attorney working for or representing the government shall not be permitted to represent the person(s)(government employee/elected official/appointee) accused of violating this legislation.  This action can be brought in local, State, and or Federal court, of the relevant region, for enforceable court action. A small claims court, shall now have an exception for these whistleblower type cases as included/defined herein, to expand the limit to $200,000, including all costs/fees/ legal fees/interest/penalties/ damages/etc…whereby a whistleblower could have their matter heard. All small claim whistleblower matters shall be heard, in 4 months or less for the trial. Whistleblowers receive their 50% of the monies/as it comes in/half is continually diverted to the whistleblower. Whistleblowers receive their 50% of the monies/as it comes in/half is continually diverted to the whistleblower. If the (whistleblower and or plaintiff loses – the whistleblower is only at risk if they were the sole plaintiff/if the whistleblower was not the sole plaintiff/the solely direct injured party/then the whistleblower has qualified immunity protection from all costs, fees, of any sort, in any capacity), the defendant and or government employee (herein defendant) fully prevails by judicial verdict/is victorious/found not to be liable in any capacity, by a judge’s order and verdict/jury verdict, then the defendant is entitled to be awarded all of their legal fees, costs, and all eligible awards and monies that they were facing/at risk to pay/in this legislation/and, the judge shall be eligible to award these monies to the defendant/and, fine these costs upon the Plaintiff. (government employee only)  The government may reimburse solely the government employee’s legal fees/legal fees only/nothing else of any sort, so long as the government employee prevailed by judicial verdict as described herein. The Plaintiff in this same scenario/if the judicial verdict is in favor of the government employee/the plaintiff would face all the same collectability risk(these monies/debts/ shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy, all bank accounts and pensions are subject to being seized and or garnished, etc…). The onus for the defendant to prevail, to be awarded monies, is a burden of proof upon the government employee, therefore a verdict/decision, signed by a judge, declaring that the defendant/government employee was absolutely free of all liability/wrong doing, is required for the defendant to be eligible to be awarded and collect monies. Any form of settlement, does not meet this threshold for any award of monies on either side beyond the terms and conditions agreed upon in the executed settlement agreement. Accord and satisfaction by use of a negotiable instrument may not be used subject to a court ordered judgment, fines, fees, costs, legal fees – all associated with a judgment.

What do you think?

Cash a settlement check from an insurance company, you can lose rights to claim anything above that amount. Dispute a creditor's bill, you get blackmailed by damaged credit. Fair?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Real World Example


Suncoast Verdict Final Judgment court case settlement check

This really is possible… it has been done before. Let’s make this way easier!!!

We cannot make this happen without your help – get involved and make a difference now.

Copyright 2021 All Rights Reserved. A 501(c)(4) non-profit and non-partisan organization. Privacy Policy